Disposed

Heera Lal v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Rajasthan HC14 Oct 2025CRLW/328/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Father-in-law challenged a Women's Commission order directing residence arrangements for his daughter-in-law at the matrimonial home. After divorce between the parties was undisputed, the High Court quashed the Commission's order and directed the SHO to unlock the locked room, prepare an inventory of her goods and return them to her.

What did the court decide?

Women's Commission order dated 03.05.2017 quashed; SHO directed to unlock the room, inventory and return respondent No.5's goods.

Heera Lal Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors. — Domestic Violence | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:41903]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 328/2017

¶4

Heera Lal S/o Shri Kanhaiya, aged about 65 years, R/o Village And Post Pragpura Via Raini, Tehsil Rajgarh, Distt. Alwar Raj.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan Through P.P.

¶8

Superintendent Of Police, Alwar Raj.

¶9

Sho, Police Station Raini, Distt. Alwar Raj. 4. State Womens Commission, Jaipur Through Its Secretary, Lalkothi, Tonk Road, Jaipur Raj.

¶10

Nirjo Devi D/o Jawan Singh, R/o Ond Meena, Tehsil Mahuwa, Distt. Dausa Raj.

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kapil Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Sharma, PP Mr. Saurabh Jain for Mr. Deepak Asopa

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order

¶14

14/10/2025

¶15

This criminal writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 03.05.2017 of Rajasthan State Women's Commission, Lal Kothi, Tonk Road, Jaipur, whereby directions were given for making proper arrangement for residence of respondent No.5.

[2025:RJ-JP:41903]

[CRLW-328/2017]

(2 of 4)

It is submitted that petitioner was father-in-law of Niroji Devi-respondent No.5, who performed marriage with petitioner's son, Harish Chandra. On account of marital discord, many litigations came to surface between the respondent No.5 and son of the petitioner Harish Chand. Even, the application filed by the respondent No.5 under the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, was dismissed qua making arrangements with regard to residence for respondent No.5 at her matrimonial home however, directions for interim maintenance were granted. It is also submitted that even otherwise civil litigation is going on between respondent No.5 and petitioner's son Harish Chandra.

¶20

It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that after filing of the instant petition, divorce has taken place between the respondent No.5 and son of the petitioner Harish Chandra; and such fact has not been disputed by learned counsel for the respondent No.5 present in this Court.

¶21

It is submitted that under the circumstances although, the order dated 03.05.2017 passed by Rajasthan State Women's Commission was without jurisdiction and authority of law yet, without addressing the merit of such order learned counsel submits that under the changed circumstances, when divorce has already taken place, the respondent No.5 has got no right to claim any right of residence at her matrimonial home. It is submitted that on account of order dated 03.05.2017, respondent No.5 has locked one room at the residence of petitioner, which is at Village and Post Pragpura Via Raini, Tehsil Rajgarh, District. Alwar (Raj.)

[2025:RJ-JP:41903]

[CRLW-328/2017]

(3 of 4)

It is submitted that although after divorce, the respondent No.5 has never turned back to her earlier matrimonial home, yet the room earlier occupied by the respondent No.1 is still locked and despite request, it has not been unlocked by respondent No.5.

¶26

Learned counsel for the respondent No.5 has also not disputed the fact that after divorce the respondent No. 5 is not interested in residing at the home of petitioner, and therefore, submits that the respondent No.5 would abide by the legitimate directions given by this Court.

¶27

Learned Public Prosecutor has also no objection in case, any order is passed on the basis of consensus between the petitioner and respondent No.5.

¶28

In the light of above, where divorce has already taken place between respondent No.5 and son of the petitioner, the order dated 03.05.2017 passed by Rajasthan State Women's Commission is hereby quashed and set-aside.

¶29

SHO, Police Station Raini is directed to take appropriate action for unlocking the room locked by respondent No.5 at the residence of petitioner at Village and Post Pragpura Via Raini, Tehsil Rajgarh, Distt. Alwar, Rajasthan, and to prepare an inventory of any goods or articles of respondent No.5, if any, present in one of the room locked by respondent No.5 pursuant to the order dated 03.05.2017 and to return all such articles, if any, to respondent No.5. The SHO shall inform the respondent No.5 for collecting the goods and in case she does not turn out then such goods shall be kept in the custody of the SHO Police Station for taking further action as per law. After unlocking/breaking of lock

[CRLW-328/2017]

[2025:RJ-JP:41903]

(4 of 4)

of the room in the house of the petitioner pursuant to order, the petitioner shall be free to utilize the same as per his convenience and comfort.

¶34

The criminal writ petition stands disposed of, accordingly.

¶35

(ANAND SHARMA),J

¶36

NEERU/9

Heera Lal v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Heera Lal v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pintu S/O Ramkesh Vs State of Rajasthan

Kamruddin Urf Kamru S/O Nassruddin Vs State of Rajasthan

Natthu and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Gopikrishan Choudhary Hurkat S/O Lt. Dwarka Das Choudhary Vs State of Rajasthan

Mohitpal Singh Alias Monu S/O Sh. Durga Singh Chouhan Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhagwansahay S/O Shri Shambhudayal Vs the State of Rajasthan